Terrance Gore and Fixing Baseball’s Broken Replay System
When exactly was it that you realized baseball’s replay system was broken? I’m very pro-replay, but I had my suspicions regarding implementation when the system was announced. The introduction of replay should, in my opinion, represent an effort to get more calls correct, but baseball saw an opportunity to give another decision to the managers and, in doing so, create more drama, more or less copying football’s own challenge system. Even so, up until yesterday I remained pro-replay because, organizing principles aside, more of the calls were made correctly under replay than would have been without it. Then Terrance Gore stole third base.
The first six innings of yesterday’s Royals/Astros was tight. Then, in the top of the seventh with one out and the Astros holding a 3-2 lead, Sal Perez was hit by a pitch. Royals manager Ned Yost removed Gore and put in pinch-runner extraordinaire Gore. I say extraordinaire because, previously in his career, he had swiped 11 bases without getting caught (including last postseason). He promptly made it 12 of 12 by taking second base rather easily. Then, with two outs and Alex Rios batting, Gore took off for third base. Here he goes!
That’s Gore stealing third. Jason Castro’s throw arrived just ahead of Gore but it was to the foul side of the bag and, as you can see, Gore’s foot clearly got in ahead of the tag. The third base umpire agreed, calling Gore safe.
The Astros challenged the call, claiming that after Gore beat the throw he came off the base for a moment, during which third baseman Luis Valbuena tagged him. Therefore he should be out. Here is the first of two GIFs (thanks to Carson Cistulli!) showing Gore’s slide and the tag. In the first, there are two points at which it appears Valbuena’s glove makes contact with Gore. You can count them off while watching.
From that angle there’s no way you call Gore out, as Gore is clearly in contact with third base for both of Valbuena’s tags. But watch this, though.
Pay particular attention to Gore’s left foot. That’s the one that comes off the base for a split second. Did Valbuena tag Gore during that split second? It doesn’t appear so to me, but clearly the replay umpires in New York disagreed. I see two moments, one where Valbuena’s wrist might have touched Gore’s bottom while his foot wasn’t in contact with the base (according to the rules that shouldn’t qualify as a tag), and another split second where Valbuena’s glove might have touched Gore’s right foot while his left foot was off the base. I’ve watched this over 100 times at this point and I can’t definitively say whether it happened or not.
But here’s the thing: it shouldn’t matter.
We can talk about the play until we’re blue in the face and surely some of us will, but it occurs to me that this isn’t the way replay was intended to be used. This isn’t within the spirit with which it was implemented. Instant replay is, I believe, an important step for baseball and having it is a good thing. It makes no sense to have replay available for everyone to see except the people on the field charged with making the actual call, and that’s how it was until this system arrived. That’s how we got stuck with things like the 1985 World Series, Armando Galarraga’s imperfect perfect game, and Jeffrey Maier’s should-have-been interference. Those things shouldn’t have happened and today they wouldn’t happen because they’d be easily overturned on replay. That’s good. If an umpire blows a safe/out call or a fan interferes that should be and now will be corrected. That’s what replay should be for. That’s its spirit.
Whether Gore was really safe or out by the rules in place right now is both next to impossible to determine and incredibly boring and stupid. Clearly Gore beat the throw. If he came off the base, it was for a split second on accident (assuming he wasn’t pushed off, which some are claiming may have happened). But now instead of sighing at an amazing athletic achievement and moving on to the next play in a dramatic game, we’re subjected to a video breakdown of the play like something out of an NFL football game. Did he catch it? Did he make a football move? What is a catch? What is a football move? What the hell? This is insane, I’m going to mow the lawn.
Sadly, the implementation of replay has created an epidemic of these insanely specific calls. A player steals a base or reaches ahead of the throw in some manner, but his momentum takes him past or off the base where, upon intimate and minute review of a few of the millions of milliseconds of the play, it is determined that one or two of those milliseconds reveal the player having left the base while the tag was still on him.
After thinking this over, I’ve come up with three possible solutions to this problem.
- Allow base runners to over-slide the bag, or institute an automatic time out after the batter reaches the base — in other words, the time out every base thief calls for after the play ends would be called by rule immediately after the runner’s hand reaches the base. This way, if his hand comes off the base, it no longer matters because time was called by rule. This effectively makes it a race to the base but, after the base is touched, the play ends, unless the batter makes a clear attempt to move up to the next base.
- Or, a more extreme version: Allow base runners to overrun all the bases. Runners can overrun first base, but not second or third. Why is that? Allowing runners to run past bases would let them reach second or third more quickly and also remove any reason to slide, which would eliminate some injuries. Like first base, the play would end once the runner touches the base, provided he makes no attempt to go to the next base.
- Eliminate the challenge system. This whole situation is MLB’s fault for implementing the NFL’s replay system. We’re lucky the managers don’t have to throw flags onto the field, lest some third base coach find himself short an eye. If we don’t want to write down a system in the rulebook to protect runners from this type of Zapruder film-style of replay, then give the ability to look at plays to the replay umpires. Allow them to contact the crew chief when a play is potentially in dispute on their own, let them make the call, and then go on with the game.
Ultimately, the question we have to ask is, is this what we want? Maybe we do want to go by the exact letter of the rules as they are now and require a player to stay in contact with the base at all times no matter how fast he arrived and how difficult it is to maintain contact with the base at all times, but that seems to me to be an unreasonable standard that has never been applied before. It seems counter to the way baseball has been played. Turning the call into a simple “did he get to the base before the tag or didn’t he?” by implementing any of the above rule changes could go a long way to improving replay, as well as ridding us of these silly and painful replay situations.
Oh man Kiley took job with Atlanta? Boooo!
I agree with you. My only issue with the article is that the bad call at first in the 1985 WS did not affect the outcome of the game. The runner never scored! If he would have been called out there still would have only been one out in the inning and the royals still would have won!
Orta was thrown out at third on a failed bunt, but the batter who reached on that fielder’s choice scored the winning run. The call absolutely affected the outcome of the game.
That Denkinger call totally changed the outcome of that game. Come on.
The two singles, the passed ball, and the foul popout that was dropped didn’t help the Cardinals, either. Denkinger blew the call, but the Cardinals went out of their way to lose after it happened.
We’ll never know, but I think there’s a good chance the Royals get at least one run that inning even if Denkinger doesn’t screw the pooch. If you reconstruct the rest of that inning without the bad call, Iorg singles in Concepcion to tie the game with two out, and then Lonnie Smith comes up with John Wathan on second and Iorg at first with a chance to win it.
Reconstructing an inning that has a base-runner on is a fool’s errand. Pitching from the stretch vs not. The split concentration over having a runner at first. The alignment of the fielders. The lack of an upset in emotion battling with the concentration required from having just got that important first out. To say the sequence that followed was inevitable, thus awarding KC the run, is pure speculative folly. On the other hand, the call didn’t cost St. Louis the title either. Contributed to, surely. But definitively? Wrong for the same reasons outlined in the case FOR the inevitability of a run in the situation.
We all like to speculate in what might have been. And this site specializes in speculation about what will be. And there is absolutely no absolutes in any of it. Just interesting talk.
Denkinger’s rep was never the same after that, which was unfortunate. I wish we had the likes of him behind the plate here in Toronto, after watching the first two home games in a red blur of outrage. And review would have gotten Denkinger off the hook. And then we would have seen something different than that we did see.
I’m of the opinion that managers should have 30 seconds from the time TIME! is called to appeal. This goofing around that takes place waiting for an assistant coach to call upstairs and get a recommendation to appeal is a waste of time. Replay WAS made to get around Denkinger, Gallaraga and the ilk. If it WAS designed to catch momentary non-contact at bases except for home, then it was designed wrong.
I think the time a manager has to challenge a call should be much less than that. If it wasn’t a bad enough call in the eyes of the team on the short end of it that they have to mull it over for 30-60 seconds first, then don’t bother challenging it.
I know that fans at home would be pissed off after seeing a replay in slow motion and wonder why their team’s manager didn’t challenge it, but it’s so annoying to have to wait to see if a challenge is going to happen, THEN wait AGAIN while the play is being reviewed.
And I disagree with the proposed rule changes to let players overslide the base. I don’t like changing rules to accommodate replay. I think that in cases like the Gore slide, it has to be clear that the fielder didn’t push or nudge the runner off the base. If the tag is placed in the direction that the runner went off the base, I think there’s enough doubt that the tag could have led to the momentary leaving the base, and the call should stand. But it’s another level of subjectivity, I know.
I thought the replay cameras were more high Def than what we see on the TV?? (even though we have 1080p and 4k, I don’t think TV providers send a signal out at that definition) This would indicate to me there is a finer ability to see exactly what happened? Isn’t this the same as the ball in the back of the glove play at first? Splitting this down to minute details seems contrary to just getting the call “right”.
Didn’t see the play until now. That was a wrist tag, not a glove tag. Whoever called him out flat out blew the call.
Getting to the point where the umps seem to be blowing replay calls in an attempt to do away with replay.
As for the rule, try this:
– once the runner reaches the bag, only call him out if he leaves the airspace of the bag. An overslide is still an overslide, but a split second adjustment is fine. Sure “airspace” is a little arbitrary, but so is letters to knees.
Didn’t care for any of the proposals in the article but love this one. Exactly cuts off the ones that aren’t in the spirit of the rules, without changing the basic rules of baseball.
I love it. You could probably clarify the airspace with something like “any part of the runner’s body being either touching or in the space directly above the bag”.
This is close to what I’d do. My general rule would be that you are only out if actually over-slide the base, in any direction, so you can’t just slide way off to the side and get the benefit of the doubt because you are not carried past the base completely. Otherwise, you have to actually fall off the base without being contacted by the fielder (which can happen with pop-up slides for instance).
Besides the fact that looking at microinches and microseconds is absurd, allowing this is just encouraging guys to push the envelope between “keeping the tag on” and “pushing the guy off the base.”
Was going to post the same thing – the 1st tag on his foot was a “tag” but of course Gore is on the bag at that point. The later “tag” wasn’t really a “tag” because he slapped his leg with his forearm or at best, the back of his wrist but frankly, I’m not sude the glove actually ever touches him on the 2nd tag.
Safe
Says nothing about “letters to knees”. It states “The Strike Zone is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants…”. The fact that a strike about the waist is hardly EVER called is a complete joke.
Agree, that the proposed changes are too much, but a spirit of the rule change is good enough for me. I mean how can anyone expect a baby giraffe (Polanco) to stop on a dime at 2B. He had the call reversed on him 3 times this year on easy SB due to the millisecond loss of base contact.
Some other options:
— Limit the replay officials to watching only full-speed replays.
— Limit the amount of time for a review to 90 seconds.
— Limit managers to one failed challenge per game.
Why not just have a reply ump who looks at plays and signals when something needs to be changed. Why the silliness of a coach’s challenge? If a call was wrong, fix it. Full speed replays defeat the purpose. We will all see the slow mo on replay, so give the ump the same opportunity.
The focus should be on getting the calls right, not all of the silly gamesmanship.
Simply because: do you trust umpires to initiate reviews of their own possibly poor calls? I don’t. Some of them sure. The Joe West’s of the world though would never review their calls if the manager’s challenge didn’t make them do it.
Because the pace of the game matters, because you shouldn’t ask paying fans and the players to wait 2-3 minutes for the microscopic examination of a play, because the vast majority of calls that are wrong will be overturned with a full-speed replay. The purpose of baseball is to entertain, and replay isn’t entertaining, no matter how many clever songs are played while the booth takes a look and another look and yet one more look from a different angle in super-slo-mo.
I don’t think the time spent during replays interferes with pace of play because it’s generally suspenseful.
As long as the stadiums are showing the replay on the big screen, it’s not boring time.
No. Sorry, but do replay right or don’t do it at all. All this garbage about limiting “x” about a replay system only serves to render it ineffective. You either care to get the umpire calls correct or you don’t. When you institute a challenge system or time the replays or anything else, all you do is ensure that the replay system WILL fail at some point in the process. I guess if your goal is to eliminate replays, then this is something you want. So there’s that.
They will always need to strike a balance between getting the calls “right” and wasting people’s time. Plays like the one discussed in the article are a perfect examples of replay wasting people’s time, all in a supposed effort to get all of the calls right.
We could examine every play until the cows come home and never miss a call, but I’d stop watching and stop following the sport all together. Alternatively we can accept that some plays are so close that there truly is no correct call – that the rules of the sport itself are completely arbitrary, and the human element, with all its flaws is still far superior to theoretical baseball played by invisible umpires in New York trying to sort out what would’ve actually happened if they had got a supposedly incorrect call right.
Or maybe players should not overslide the base? I don’t see an issue here. You will and have had the same ‘problems’ with tag plays at home.
Right.
The problem here isn’t a replay problem, it’s a rules problem (and therefore never will get fixed). It is contrary to the rest of the way the game is played for tag plays to become wrestling matches. Note that this problem isn’t new by any means. Kent Hrbek, to name one, was notorious for getting tag outs at first because runners just “happened” to come off the bag while he was tagging them, never mind that Herbie was about the size of an elephant and at least half as strong. You’d have to have dropped an anchor to stay on the bag when he applied a tag.
Something like a “comment” to the existing rule should suffice, along the lines of “Once a runner has touched the base, if the fielder’s glove is in contact with the runner when contact with the base is broken, no out shall be declared unless the fielder also breaks contact with the runner and re-applies the tag.” Not perfect, and words can probably be tweaked to improve it, but it addresses travesties like the Gore “out,” and in the process, eliminates a lot of specious replays.
Braves fan? The Hrbek WS play at first was not a tag, it was him standing at the bag with his leg surprisingly far forward and stiff and letting who ever it was fall over him. And yes, I am a recovering Twins fan.
Not a Braves fan, and not referring specifically to that play. Hrbek did that all the time. So did, and do, other large first basemen when they can.
How on earth can we be advocating for allowing baserunners to overslide/run bases three days after the Utley incident?
You’re just begging for more injuries in the middle infield with that. Which to be fair, they were already begging for by instituting replay and thereby eliminating the neighborhood play without simultaneously changing the way interference is judged on double plays.
Get rig of the challenge, it’s dumb. They’ve already got a review center set up, just adopt the hockey model.
They didn’t eliminate the neighborhood play.
Well, except for on the Utley slide. That time they did.
I don’t think they eliminated the neighborhood play. I think what happened is that in their judgement, part of why Tejada might have missed the bag was because he had to reach for an imperfect feed from Murphy. If the fielder is in complete control, then they get the neighborhood play, but on a play like that one, if it’s plausible that missing the bag was caused by the throw being off, then the neighborhood play isn’t in effect.
I was rooting for the Mets and I am saying I agreed with that part of the call, as unfortunate as it was. Although I thought it was clear that Utley’s intent was just to break up the DP since he had NO intent to stop at 2B (when he starts his slide PAST 2B, that is clear), so a DP should have been called.
So I can just run over 2nd base full speed without even sliding? Even on a double play ball?
If the batter hits the ball to the warning track, why not just give him the home run? Close enough. If the pitcher get the ball relatively close to the strike zone, let’s give him a strike call. Conversely, if the batter takes a pitch that almost misses the zone, give him the ball call.
Baseball isn’t a game of “close enough.” The base runners need to stay on the bag, just like fielders should hold the tag (as opposed to the ‘swipe tags’). Proper technique is part of the game, as well it should be. In this case, the dispute should be about whether Valbuena had the tag with his glove while Gore was off the bag. That is a relatively black and white issue. Saying “The runner beat the throw” is lazy umpiring.
What constitutes running out of the baseline then ? Or a checked swing ?
For better or worse, there are some calls that still fall into a grey area, I don’t think it’s fair to say it doesn’t exist in the game.
I love the replay system. It should be as precise and tedious as possible. Players will adapt.
I don’t think the replay process or guidelines are wrong, based on this incident.
I think the problem is that they overruled the Gore call in spite of the fact that the evidence was not conclusive. It is, and should always be, necessary for the replay to provide overwhelming and conclusive proof that the call was wrong in order to overturn it.
If they change the rules to allow runners’ feet to temporarily come off the bag without putting the runner at risk of being tagged out, I am afraid we would be heading down a very slippery slope.
I don’t agree with all at how Gore was called out, that’s not what replay is used for in my opinion for what baseball has claimed its used for. You have it right in terms of there was no conclusive evidence that his foot had come out the back or the tag was on while it happened. Either way no way should go or be called out, we don’t even know if his right foot had kept on the bag while all that other nonsense went on. Fact is Gore was safe, and although not a Royals fan the Royals got screwed
Agree with this.
There was a similar event in game 2 of the Jays Rangers game in the 14th inning. It sure looked like the runner was completely off second base when the fielder was tagging him but no video that definitively showed the lack of contact. Unfortunately for the Jays, the safe call was upheld because of the lack of proof and the runner eventually scored the game winning run.
In the Rangers-Jays game, the runner was clearly out. There was a visible interval where the runner was clearly off the bag and the tag was being applied.
That being said, the Jays lost the game because they couldn’t score a single run for the 5 previous innings. By shear luck they could have tagged him out but they didn’t deserve to win that game.
In the case of Gore, the commentary states that he came off the bag, and the quibble is he may or may not have been tagged. Since he did come off the bag, & Valbuena was clearly intent on tagging him out, accept that he deserved to be out and move on. Stealing a base isn’t like a track meet where you cross a finish line; that’s why it’s so hard.
It is quite possible to steal a bag without oversliding.
Despite the finest wishes of Royals fans, who have had their fair share of good fortune this post season, the rules of the game are unlikely to be adjusted to suit them.
“That being said, the Jays lost the game because they couldn’t score a single run for the 5 previous innings”
True, but the Rangers couldn’t score in the previous 5 innings either. Giving teams extra outs/runners, whether by error or bad umpire call, definitely makes it that much harder to win.
You could easily make the same argument for Valbuena needing to make a proper tag on Gore for him to be called out.
Ultimately the replay system is only going to serve to continue diminishing the number of stolen base attempts in a league that is already clearly lacking them.
+1. This is my biggest problem with replay in baseball. There’s no standard that the evidence has to be clear and convincing to overturn the call on the field. I watch a ton of baseball and the standard as far as I can tell is that if the replay ump thinks there’s a 50.1% chance the call on the field might have been wrong, they’ll overturn it. Which is just ridiculous.
Also, are the replay umps in NY watching the game without audio or are they (during these playoffs) watching the same national broadcasts all the rest of us are? Because when this call was reversed I couldn’t help wonder if the broadcaster (and I forget who was in the booth) might have actually convinced them that Valbuena was still tagging Gore when it was obvious to me that his forearm was in contact but the glove wasn’t. I seriously wonder if it was a different broadcast team saying from the beginning, “this challenge is silly, the only split second his foot left the bag, the fielder’s glove isn’t even on him” if the call would have been upheld. The announcers saw something I didn’t see (and judging from the comments here, something that most other viewers didn’t see either) and then coincidentally, the replay ump in NY saw it the same way.
Come to think of it, the incredibly narrow review of the Utley play (not even considering whether interference should have been called) rather mirrored the focus of the announcers as well, didn’t it? Maybe they should just make the replay ump part of the broadcast team. It would at least be more transparent.
What’s wrong with overturning a call if they are 50.1% confident? If they are going to review the call, they might as well make the best call they can with the resources they have, right?
As far as the Utley call goes, I find it silly that they cannot overturn blatantly obvious blown judgement calls. It seems like they could add some judgement calls to the list of reviewable calls.
Replay was implemented to overturn calls that were clearly missed on the field, not to try to uncover microscopic, freeze frame gotcha moments on plays absolutely no one would question in real time. That’s for starters. When they are then overturning plays like this one where that moment isn’t even clear… I mean, how can you even ask what’s wrong with that? EVERYTHING is wrong with that.
In this case the replay ump was so zealous trying to discover one of these micro-moments that he just plain invented it, since Valbuena’s glove wasn’t even on Gore the split second his foot left the bag (not to mention that it does seem likely to me that it was his own weight that pushed Gore off the bag in the first place). What I want is for MLB to sit down with the replay umps and say, “Hold on a second. It’s not your job to re-call every review play as best you can with the benefit of super-duper slo-mo; it’s only your job to overturn when you can see with absolute certainty, and with the confidence that virtually every neutral observer watching will agree, that the call was missed. Everything else should be deemed inconclusive and not your job to weigh in on.”
I’m fine with managers having 1 challenge, with late inning discretion left to the umps/replay officials. Although I’d also be fine with just having everything left to the umps.
I’m also fine with the minutiae of a player being tagged out for leaving the base for a millisecond – them’s the rules. Assuming he’s tagged with the glove and not the wrist, of course.
I do think there could be clarification of the rules for when a fielder uses his tag to push the runner off the base, which happens sometimes.
The obvious solution is to go the fencing route and electronically detect contact of glove to player and player to base.
I would make very small lifts off the base “non-reviewable”, like we have for the neighbourhood play, infield fouls, and balls and strikes.
The umpire, in real-time after the play, basically decides whether he saw the player leave the bag. If he felt the player left the bag, then you can review whether the fielder applied a tag before he got back to the base, but if the ump did not believe that the player left the bag, then you can’t review the play.
That would solve the problem of a player popping up a foot off the base and the fielder trying to tag him them, as opposed to a case like this where he would have been safe if the base was a half inch taller. If the player clearly leaves the base you can catch him, but that prevents the cases like this being called out.
I’m not sure if I’ve ever in my life seen a guy fly up off the base that far. Guys fall off the base. If what you’re saying is it would be crazy if a guy falling off a base could maintain safe status so long as his foot remained above the base (even 2-3 feet above it) as he regained his balance, I agree, but I would just characterize that as sliding/falling off the base.
The bottom line is plays like this should not be ruled outs, even if there were a better angle and the tag was actually made with the glove. I think all the reasonable people agree with that. We just need as simple a rule as possible that achieves that while maintaining baseball be played and called as normally as possible.
Huh? “All reasonable people” agree with you?
So if beating the throw but coming off the bag is safe, then what about this: If the centerfielder sprints forward off when the ball is hit, makes a killer dive, and catches the ball, but the ball pops to the ground for half a second before he gets it back in his glove, is that an out? By your logic, he made the play, got to the ball, and that split second doesn’t matter. Cmon now.
Replay is boring, but getting the call right should be the most important thing.
No umpire, in live action, has ever, in the history of the world, called someone out on a play similar to the Gore play. This is the same as the “shifting football” play, which is now called a legal catch (football might have some work to do but nobody thinks a controlled ball that shifts half an inch should equal incomplete pass. Well, no one who’s reasonable. What you describe has always been called not an out).
The Mariners had a similar challenge (I believe against the Astros, which may have instigated this one). The angle the camera had, because of where cameras are lined up near third base, was different from what any umpire in the history of baseball has ever had. It is as though the umpire were sitting in the third base dugout looking straight at the bag from field level. Cameras see things that simply were never seen before and the question is whether that effectively is a change in the rules of baseball. Which is quite different from whether Jeffrey Meier interfered with a ball in the field of play.
Even if the replay showed that Valbuena got his glove on him instead of his wrist, I am still not sure he should be called out since it also appeared possible Valbuena was leaning on Gore as he was coming up after the slide.
Again, there was just not enough evidence here to overrule the field umpire’s call.
It was too messy of a situation to be able to say “No, he was clearly out.”
Wouldn’t most reasonable people just go with ” if you break contact with the base; you’re off the base?”
Seems like an Occam’s Razor moment to me.
Do we really want umpires and managers arguing about whether a player was “in the air of zone located directly above the base” when he was tagged?
The latter just seems absurd.
Uhh … apparently the neighborhood play IS reviewable.
I think a 60 second review limit would be nice. If nothing conclusive can be seen that quickly then the original call stands.
This. I watch a lot of Mets games and Keith Hernandez decries the long delays as they parse the film frame by frame. If it’s bang bang and you really have to look incredibly hard to determine if the call is wrong, then it’s right. Play on.
This this and more this.
Just correct the obvious blown calls in short order and move on. Basically, if the 2 replays that we would get between pitches don’t show us enough to be sure it was wrong, I don’t want it overturned. And by sure, I want like 99.9% chance it was the wrong call. None of this kinda-sorta if you squint you can tell he might of tagged the guy on frame number 4598 while the cleat was .1 mm off the bag.
I agree with the time limit, but 60 seconds might not be enough to see every angle. I’d say 100 seconds is enough, but yeah, if you’re still deliberating after that, just stick with the field call.
Asking simply cuz I don’t know. Has MLB ever said what the spirit behind replay is?
Spirit? To get calls right.
The spirit is pretty much by definition not officially declared.
I think everyone is overreacting. Player’s will adjust and plays like this will happen less and less.
There is that possibility. We’re seeing and hearing much about this type of play because it’s been happening much more this season. That’s because teams have instructed their fielders to keep their gloves on the runner. In the past they wouldn’t have bothered, at least not to this level. So just as the fielders have adjusted their actions based on replay, we may see runners adapt their sliding technics to match.
“Player’s will adjust and plays like this will happen less”
Just like in the NFL, amirite?
The adjustment will be considerably less stolen base attempts.
Allow momentary breaks with the bag on slides once the runner has been called safe. It will be the baserunner’s version of the neighborhood play. It’s really not that hard to fix.
Define “momentary”.
Just kidding, sort of.
The momentary break could be viewed in the same light as a pitcher being required to keep his foot in contact with the rubber/pitching-plate during the initiation of the pitching motion. Pitchers aren’t really “in contact” with it, just right next to it.
#3 all the way. The totally unnecessary, baroquely confected challenge system introduces all kind of weird gamesmanship for no actual reason or rationale (at least that I’ve ever heard articulated). Let the umps use replay to get the call right, and leave the managers and the teams out of it.
+1 for “baroquely confected”. Not sure what it means but it sounds smart!
It means “over-complicatedly made-up” plus I was forced to eat a thesaurus as a child
I was forced to eat a stegosaurus as a child. Once you get past the armor, they really do taste like chicken!
Forced? You did that by own damn free will. Don’t blame me for those chipped teeth.
I only wear Colon when I have a shirt on.
Easy way to fix the replay system…not allowing managers/teams to communicate with video room ….you want to challenge the play…you do it the same way ump say it…
Anyway…can someone explain how they call Gore out and Odor safe (game 2)???
This might be my favorite solution. The only thing worse than the long delay during the challenge itself is the manager standing on the top step for 3 minutes finding out if he should challenge or not.
FWIW: I distinctly remember this exact scenario happening on more than one occasion with Billy Hamilton. It was almost like a hail mary from the other team; ‘well, we’ll never throw him out, but we sure can hope to get an out on a technicality.’ It never worked and no one cared because the Reds were terrible and the bases never made a difference, but this isn’t a new problem. I’m glad the playoffs are shining a spotlight on it and hopefully something like #1 can be implemented for next year.
Seems like it would be pretty easy to implement a “first contact” rule. If the runner makes contact with the base before the tag, he is safe. Once he hits the bag the play is dead. Anything after that is irrelavant.
What if the throw goes into center field? He can’t advance to third?
Well obviously yes he would be allowed to advance. When i say the play is dead i mean in terms of the tag play. Dont overthink it.
Wouldn’t that just lead to runners utilizing a form of hook slides and or dives where they just tap/touch any part of the base without having to worry about retaining contact with it … just as long as they touch the base before they are tagged?
Yes, I am saying runners would try to exploit any rule they could, just as defenders would.
The only problem here is the inability of players to slide properly into the base. I’d say this kind of call is exactly why replay was implemented.
Also, it’s ‘by accident’ not ‘on accident’.
Toodeloo
I tweeted to you to write about this, was it my idea? Also, it is an athletic penalty. Less athletic players are not going to be sliding with such momentum that they overslide the base.
Counterpoint: More atheletic players have better body control and stay on the base.
Do away with the challenge.
Put an ump in a booth at the stadium. Let him watch the game. If he sees, during live action, a play he wants to review he can review until the next pitch is thrown. If he wants to change the call he buzzes the home plate ump.
So damn simple.
When I watched this in real-time I thought: what a dumb over-turn. Woo-hoo! Go Not-the-Royals!
Later I thought: The beauty of baseball is that most calls are in theory, black and white. It’s why we can argue so strongly about balls and strikes, safe and out, in a way complaining about fouls in basketball, soccer, football can’t REASONABLY be argued so strongly. Either the ball was in the zone or it wasn’t. Either the runner was tagged while he wasn’t on the base, or he was not.
I’m not sure what we gain by allowing this sort of play to be called safe. It opens things up to more interpretation. Now… controversy is good for ratings and sportswriters, so maybe more interpretation is a good thing for the business. But since the Posey rule…I haven’t heard a lot of folks too excited about how more interpretation is working out for the game. So, again, I’m not sure what we gain by opening the game up to more interpretation, and less black-and-white decisions.
I find it difficult to believe that on Fangrphs I’m reading an article proposing that we ignore basebll’s rules.
If you are tagged out, you’re out. Almost staying on the bag is off the bag. Almost safe is out.
The only thing these silly contortions being proposed above will accomplish is even MORE controversy: how far off the bad DID he go? How long is too long? Etc etc etc.
Leave it alone.
The problem is that we’re talking about plays where no one really knows for sure. They’re so close that you can’t tell even looking frame by frame. It’s good to get the right call but when you’re wasting time and ruining the game challenging calls where you can barely tell in super slow motion what exactly happened, there’s something wrong.
But we do know for sure. He lost contact with third base. When you start down the road of “but he only lost contact by a LITTLE” you no longer have a rule.
If you don’t think he was tagged, you might have an argument, but tats a different one, and an argument against a missed call, not against replay or coming off the bag.
The replay system is broken if Gore is out here and Odor was safe in Toronto. That’s the same level of randomness that the on field umps can provide.
This call was a bad one ( I’m not seeing a tag with the glove while he’s off the base ), but to go to “replay is broken” is going way too far.
A toss-up call like this would be no less of a toss-up 5 years ago.
And sure, some bad calls don’t get overturned, but many, many bad calls get overturned. I would say the ratio of bad calls overturned to good vs good calls overturned to bad is probably 10 to 1. That’s a win.
“Replay is broken” sounds like “Make America Great Again” to me.
I’ve seen this review several times this year when a runner is called out when he clearly beats the play but in the course of his slide loses contact with the base. I first saw it early last year on a play where Robinson Cano stole second, was called safe just as that play has been called for 50 years. Then the called was reversed on a challenge as it was clear he lost contact with the base and was tagged.
Someone mentioned it above, but quite simply this play should not be reviewable for the same reason the neighborhood play isn’t reviewable. The rule interpretation in practice differs from what the rule book says and thus we defer to how umpires call it rather than effectively changing the rule.
You can challenge that a player was tagged BEFORE he touched a base. You can’t challenge if he lost contact with the base during his slide.
As for replay in general, I agree with sending all calls to New York and eliminating manager challenges.
“millions of milliseconds”
Um, a million milliseconds is 16 minutes and 40 seconds. As slow as baseball can be, it’s not that slow.
Maybe they should consider making the bases bigger so that they’re not so easy to lose contact with. Combine it with the “airspace” idea of earlier poster Francis.
The pitcher once pitched from a box several feet on a side. How about making bases two feet on each side? It would be easier for middle infielders to make sure they touched the base, making the neighborhood play less of a problem, and lessen contact between runners and fielders.
It seems Valbuena’s momentum and uniform pants pulled Gore’s left foot off the bag. I’d call him safe.
My view is that “100% correct” is an impossible standard to achieve (no, no one has advocated that here). Given that perfection can’t be reached, the proper perspective is a cost-benefit examination between the time delay of a review and the increased percentage of correct calls. Which would vary from person to person.
To me, the marginal benefit of a call that could likely be corrected with 3 minutes of frame-by-frame analysis is much lower than the cost of the 3 minute delay itself. I feel that umpires generally do pretty well, and if a replay system can correct their most egregious and moderately egregious mistakes within 60 or 75 seconds, then the system works perfectly. Anything beyond that is logically a very close call that is not clear one way or another, so let it stand and get back to baseball. I want to watch the players play.
Also, just put one more ump in each crew who would rotate into a box every 5th night who is responsible for checking any potentially wrong calls. The challenge system is a silly attempt at adding gamesmanship and it further increases delays. Just my two cents.
The comments about Gore not knowing how to slide, based on him “coming off of the bag” are just killing me. Talk about being clueless of athleticism and body control.
Leave the dumb super slow motion replay alone and watch it in real time and see why he “came off the bag”. Seeing this replay causes me concern that defenders will now be encouraged and rewarded for “nudging runners off the bag”.
This play should have been a total “non review”.
The runner was safe by a mile and his foot only came off the ground once a different part of his leg was contacted/pushed by the defender’s elbow.
The replay and overturn were total horseshit.
I propose some sort of penalty for a failed replay challenge.